In re Ceaser R
Filed 4/11/06 In re Ceaser R. CA6
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS
California Rules of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 977(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
| In re CEASER R. et al. Persons Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law. | H028820 (Santa Clara County Super.Ct.Nos. JD11436, JD11437, JD11438) |
| SANTA CLARA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF FAMILY AND CHILDREN'S SERVICES, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. JULIE N., Defendant and Appellant. |
Julie N. appeals from the order terminating her parental rights to three of her children (Ceaser R., Joseph R., and R.R.) and placing them for adoption. (Welf. & Inst. Code, §§ 366.26, 395.)[1] On appeal, she asserts several claims of error, including:
(1) trial court error in concluding the evidence did not establish the sibling bond exception to the termination of her parental rights; (2) trial court error in failing to appoint independent counsel for the minors when it became apparent there was an actual conflict of interest among them; (3) insufficient evidence of R.'s adoptability; and (4) trial court error in failing to ensure that the Indian Child Welfare Act (25 U.S.C. § 1901 et seq.) (ICWA) notice requirements were met. We find no prejudicial error, and affirm the order.
BACKGROUND
This appeal concerns mother's three younger children: Ceaser R., born in March 1995, Joseph R., born in May 1996, and R.R., born in June 1997.[2] Mother has four older children, who were initially detained with the younger ones: Valerie V., born in 1984, Alicia P., born in 1989, Anita P., born in 1990, and Alfred P., Jr., born in 1991. All seven children were placed in protective custody on December 5, 1999, when the police went to their home and found â€
